Bonds is a great player but because he's denying everything so much he's lookin like a fuckin douche bag, which is why he has no team. Same with Clemens. If they would've handled both situations like Pettite both would be no doubt candidates for the HOF. Steroids don't help with the most important part of everything in baseball, mechanics, but the players need to admit if they did when they got so much shit against them that it becomes pretty obvious.

Rockies could end up coming back, but they're not playing anywhere near as good this year as they did at any point last year, so I honestly doubt it.

Yankees will get old, but they're the Yankees. They'll attract young players because of the name. I'm a Boston fan as well, but the Yankees will stay good. And if the Rays keep things up there's good reason to believe the Yankees will finally have a season where they miss the playoffs

I agree that steroids is not the fundamental factor of what makes a good baseball player - but it does give the player an advantage over players that did not use. So when you combine good mechanics, raw talent, and steroids....its an unfair advantage....

I agree that steroids is not the fundamental factor of what makes a good baseball player - but it does give the player an advantage over players that did not use. So when you combine good mechanics, raw talent, and steroids....its an unfair advantage....

Click to expand...

Oh, most definitely man. Bonds and Clemens already have some of the best mechanics ever seen in baseball. It's just they're assholes and if they would've handled things differently both would probably be playing somewhere right now instead of sitting at home watchin from the TV

Well, I personally dislike both of them. Clemens with the whole Piazza thing in 2001, and now all of the lying about HGH and everything (I mean, his own boy - pettite ratted him out lol).
and Bonds for obvious reasons.....pretty sure nobody likes him, except TAC.

They're both one in the same. Both would have been up for consideration for the greatest of all time in their respective positions but steroids tarnished their careers.

Roger Clemens has 354 career wins, 2 triple crowns.

Barry Bonds has 7 Mvps yes, the most Mvps, and Roger Clemens has the most Cy youngs with 7 including his own MVP, only pitcher since the early 1970s to have an MVP, would have been 2 pitchers if Pedro wasnt robbed though. Not to mention 6 World Series appearances with 2 rings. Hes also 3rd on the list of all time strike outs. Would have been second if he didnt fuck himself over and now Randy Johnson is second.

I really have no argument to who is better. Both players careers were great.

But none of that shit matters because they both are NOT going to get in the Hall of fame due to 2 determining factors:

1) Steroids, thats a given.
2) Pete Rose. Bud Selig stated when Pete Rose was banned that as long as he's commisioner of the MLB, Pete Rose will never be in the Hall of Fame. Pete Rose was banned for reasons other then playing the game, which he was great at and always played the game right and clean. They allow Bonds and Clemens in, they open the door wide open for arguments as to why Rose isnt in.

And speaking of Pete Rose.....is there any proof that he bet AGAINST his own team? I mean, if he only bet on his own team to win every night - i see no problem with that. But I guess his problem is that he has just lied about betting every single time - whether he bet on or against his team.

And speaking of Pete Rose.....is there any proof that he bet AGAINST his own team? I mean, if he only bet on his own team to win every night - i see no problem with that. But I guess his problem is that he has just lied about betting every single time - whether he bet on or against his team.

Click to expand...

Pete Rose wrote a huge admission report stating that he gambled on his own team and many others.

I have no problem if he bet on his team to win, i would only have a problem if he bet against his own team.

Click to expand...

Actually that is pretty bad either way. No one should bet on their own team, especially since it asks the question on whether or not he managed the games to go along with who he bet on. Fixing always comes into question when you're the person that can influence the outcome.

As a manager, he SHOULD always try to be winning. So if he bet on his team to win - i personally don't have a problem with that. If he fixed games, to give them a better chance to lose.......then thats where I have a problem.

lmao its obvious you know nothing about baseball. clemens > bonds? dude, bonds could single handedly change a game. ive been to games where a team would rather walk in the tieing run in the 9th rather than face him.